While Khoo tries to scare the public about antibiotics in hamburgers, the organization he works for declares that it’s a non-issue. Earlier this year, Keep Antibiotics Working (KAW), a coalition that includes UCS, successfully campaigned against a proposed meat label that would read “no detectable antibiotics residue.” KAW said the label would lead to “confusion,” and that it’s pointless anyway, since “antibiotic residue” — the stuff in your burger — isn’t a big deal. So while UCS raises fears about antibiotics in burgers (fears that KAW admits are unfounded) KAW works to kill a label that would help counter those fears.

If KAW succeeded in banning sub-therapeutic antibiotics in animals, about half of existing cattle, hogs, and chickens wouldn’t survive long enough to go to market. That would dramatically raise meat prices, thereby reducing meat consumption. At the same time, farmers would probably raise more animals than they do now, to make up for the ones lost to disease. And that would multiply the environmental impact of farming that groups like the Waterkeeper Alliance say they are so concerned about in the first place.